LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 15.5

Help for RECMGMT-L Archives


RECMGMT-L Archives

RECMGMT-L Archives


View:

Next Message | Previous Message
Next in Topic | Previous in Topic
Next by Same Author | Previous by Same Author
Chronologically | Most Recent First
Proportional Font | Monospaced Font

Options:

Join or Leave RECMGMT-L
Reply | Post New Message
Search Archives


Subject:

Re: Ratio of Functional versus Explicit RRSs

From:

Terry Mergele <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 22 Feb 2010 06:13:02 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (1 lines)


Hi Mimi:

KCI transitioned from a department-oriented schedule with 602 record types to a functional one (FAT) containing 90 record series. I have not yet tackled international requirements; that will add series due to country exceptions.

I appreciate the theory behind "big buckets" but believe that, inasmuch as any one individual is not likely to need to be able to classify more than, say, 5 or 6 record types, a schedule that is summarized as ours is is not going to be cumbersome. I've heard Peter Skupsky call them "personal big buckets."

Let us know how your poll comes out.

Best regards,

Terry Mergele
Kinetic Concepts, Inc.
Mobile 210-394-9422
Office 210-255-6260


--- On Sat, 2/20/10, Mimi Dionne <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: Mimi Dionne <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Ratio of Functional versus Explicit RRSs
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Saturday, February 20, 2010, 11:10 AM
> I'm looking for survey results on
> the percentage of co
> Good morning!
>
> I'm looking for survey results on the percentage of
> companies that have transitioned their explicit records
> retention schedule to a functional/big bucket one.
>
> Private commentary from esteemed colleagues on the list who
> can confirm for me that either:
>
> 1. Their company has transitioned to a functional RRS
> (including date range for that project) or,
>
> 2. A short work history that outlines the number of
> companies that had explicit records retention
> schedules versus the number of companies they've worked for
> that have functional ones and the date ranges of this work
> experience.
>
> (And, by "explicit", I mean "fully and clearly expressed or
> demonstrated; leaving nothing merely implied;
> unequivocal"--you know what I mean: the larger RRSs that
> have 200+ records series and outline specifically every
> possible document type. Easier for the employee and records
> staff to understand what is a record and for how long
> it should be retained; cumbersome to implement in the
> ERMS.)
>
> The reason I'm looking for this information is because I'm
> wondering if it's fair to state that most companies have
> transitioned to a functional retention schedule today. These
> survey results may be out there and I'm not aware of it--if
> you can point me in the right direction, I'd be very
> grateful!
>  
> Thank you,
>  
> Mimi Dionne, MLIS, CA, CDIA+, CRM, PMP
> Cell: 303.501.7657
> Blog: http://rimnant.blogspot.com
> Twitter: @mimidionne
> Facebook: mimidionne
> LinkedIn: Mimi Dionne, PMP, CRM, CDIA+, CA
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>
>
> List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
> Contact [log in to unmask]
> for assistance
> To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not
> already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB
> RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>


      

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]


Back to: Top of Message | Previous Page | Main RECMGMT-L Page

Permalink



LISTS.UFL.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager